PDA

View Full Version : SF handgun ban has won (prop H)


berg
11-08-2005, 10:28 PM
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/11/08/state/n221356S64.DTL

Voters approved ballot measures to ban handguns in San Francisco and urge the city's public high schools and college campuses to keep out military recruiters Tuesday.

With 98 percent of San Francisco precincts reporting, 58 percent of voters backed the proposed gun ban while 42 percent opposed it.

Measure H prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and make it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.

Although law enforcement, security guards and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April.

A coalition led by the National Rifle Association has said it plans to challenge the initiative in court on Wednesday if the measure passes, arguing that cities do not have the authority to regulate firearms under California law.

Only two other major U.S. cities — Washington and Chicago — have implemented such sweeping handgun bans.

The military recruitment initiative also won with 59 percent in favor and 41 percent against.

Measure I, dubbed "College Not Combat," opposes the presence of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges. However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing federal funding.

Instead, Proposition I encourages city officials and university administrators to exclude recruiters and create scholarships and training programs that would reduce the military's appeal to young adults.

blacklisted
11-08-2005, 10:48 PM
This is terrible. I don't know what to say, or do.

Mike Searson
11-08-2005, 10:52 PM
Only two other major U.S. cities — Washington and Chicago — have implemented such sweeping handgun bans.

NYC is just as bad, too.

blacklisted
11-08-2005, 10:56 PM
Why are all the articles saying that residents MUST hand their guns to the police? I thought there was an option to get them out of the city.

bu-bye
11-08-2005, 11:27 PM
I'm sorry guys. Its a big kick in the nuts thats for sure. Have any of you thought about moving out of the city?

stealthmode
11-08-2005, 11:27 PM
i would bury them

Brass Balls
11-08-2005, 11:58 PM
Under state law, local governments are forbidden from requiring firearms to be registered or licensed. So how will the city go about collecting handguns from the citizens of SF?

I'll bet the police are not excited about the prospect of going door to door to confiscate people's handguns.

bg
11-09-2005, 12:00 AM
Under state law, local governments are forbidden from requiring firearms to be registered or licensed. So how will the city go about collecting handguns from the citizens of SF?

I'll bet the police are not excited about the prospect of going door to door to confiscate people's handguns.
Through DROS ? Never been so ashamed of the city I was hatched in.

artherd
11-09-2005, 12:04 AM
I'll bet the police are not excited about the prospect of going door to door to confiscate people's handguns.
New Orleans has shown us that they WILL DO IT however.

Registration invariably leads to confiscation!

I think I'm going to puke. Brothers and Sisters in the city, tonight I am with you.

NYC2SoCal
11-09-2005, 12:05 AM
NYC is just as bad, too.

NYC is bad, but not that bad.. It's very restrictive, but you can have firearms (including handguns if you have a permit), and you can definitely own a firearm if you own a business. SF outright forbids it, and DC forbids having it loaded.

This is truely a sad day for SF. If I lived in SF, I would move. It only means one thing, armed criminals will begin their outright assault on humanity.

Charliegone
11-09-2005, 12:05 AM
I say all gun owners get of San Fran. ,leave the others there alone. When they start to experience high crimes and what not, I hope they don't go around complaining WE NEED MORE GUN CONTROL.:mad:

Clodbuster
11-09-2005, 12:25 AM
You know that is exactly what they WILL complain about. Banning handguns didn't go far enough to curb crime. Need to get rid of rifles next.

Wonder what runs through the heads of these people. You see stupid people, but they don't know they're stupid.

Clod

I say all gun owners get of San Fran. ,leave the others there alone. When they start to experience high crimes and what not, I hope they don't go around complaining WE NEED MORE GUN CONTROL.:mad:

Drifter721
11-09-2005, 12:39 AM
There are a lot of our fellow brothers and sisters in San Francisco that aren't feeling very good about the state of their city and country right about now. We are with you. Hang in there. Don't be discouraged. My hopes are that the NRA and the US Attorney General will do an injunction, and turn this into a win for the US Constitution.

SixDemonBag
11-09-2005, 12:43 AM
I'm pretty upset over all this, but I'm now trying to think of what this proposition will ACTUALLY mean to me. I'm a resident of SF, but I will NOT be handing over my guns, nor will anyone take them from me. I will still be able to purchase handguns, afterall, I'm going to be storing them in a friends friend cousins house in Napa. :D

Aside from the whiny, liberal trash that infects this city which allows this kind of garbage to be passed, not much else regarding this 'law' effects me. I hope the NRA wins in court tomorrow so I can let go of some of this hatred I'm feeling right now.

Either way, after school, I'm leaving this beautiful city to rot with it's twisted, emotional based politics. It's a shame CA is such a haven for terrible law and politics, as it really is as close to a naturally perfect place for me as can be.

Yute
11-09-2005, 1:07 AM
Wow, what a bummer.
I just keep thinking that this will be the end of High Bridge Arms...

saki302
11-09-2005, 1:41 AM
Stupid is as stupid does. Guess what the majority in SF are....:rolleyes:

-Dave

SI-guru
11-09-2005, 1:45 AM
:mad: :mad:
Best of luck my brothers and sisters in SF. Looks like the second round will be in the court. They scored round one but the fight is far from over.

MaxQ
11-09-2005, 2:34 AM
Unbelievable. :(

After seeing how naive and just plain nuts Angela Alioto was on OReilly Monday night, with her inane belief that the police will always protect all citizens, and after what just happened in New Orleans, I couldn't believe that even San Francisco would go this far.

I had two friends relocate down to LA this year cause they had enough of not only the mentality, but also the perverse sense of pride with which many in SF seem to despise all things normal and American. In their words - It's no place to raise a kid anymore. It's amazing how restrictive liberalism truly is.

Best wishes to all of you up there. Hopefully this will be overturned in the courts before the infection spreads...

And I guess free speech rights don't apply to military recruiters. Combine these with the other statewide propositions and, well, it was just a really depressing night for clear thinking Californians.

MrTuffPaws
11-09-2005, 6:06 AM
So, is the NRA even going to do anything about this? Is anyone going to actually take it to court?

halifax
11-09-2005, 6:35 AM
I'd be willing to bet there will be a run on shotgun purchases soon.

BTW, how will this effect the 10 CCW holders in SF?

thomasanelson
11-09-2005, 7:27 AM
To continue on with what SAKI302 was thinking:


Tyranny is as tyranny does...

Republicans did not make "Liberal" a bad name....Liberals made "Liberal" a bad name.

blacklisted
11-09-2005, 7:29 AM
I'd be willing to bet there will be a run on shotgun purchases soon.

BTW, how will this effect the 10 CCW holders in SF?

If they are politicians, it probably wont.

blacklisted
11-09-2005, 7:32 AM
Only 153,000 people voted on this? Aren't there at least 500,000 people in San Fransisco (not including the homeless, which makes it 1 million)?

DULLYJAY
11-09-2005, 7:33 AM
Neighboring counties we can't let this spread:mad: . What can we do now?

Bruce
11-09-2005, 7:33 AM
There are a lot of our fellow brothers and sisters in San Francisco that aren't feeling very good about the state of their city and country right about now. We are with you. Hang in there. Don't be discouraged. My hopes are that the NRA and the US Attorney General will do an injunction, and turn this into a win for the US Constitution.

Don't count on it. The NRA and its non-California membership have written us off. As far as our "brothers & sisters" in the other 49 are concerned, ANY Californian is a worthless, granola eating, gay parasite . As for the AG, he's got an anti-gun track record. Besides, the 9th Circus has rulled that the 2nd Ammendment is a collective right not an individual right. What we can look forward to is this crap extending beyond Frisco to the rest of the state.

blacklisted
11-09-2005, 7:34 AM
Neighboring counties we can't let this spread:mad: . What can we do now?

I agree, we must do something. I think a RKBA amendment is our best option right now.

Brass Balls
11-09-2005, 7:54 AM
Precincts Reporting - 578 out of 578 - 100%
http://images.ibsys.com/sh/images/weather/spacer.gif
http://images.ibsys.com/sh/images/weather/electionbar.gifSan Francisco Co. Proposition H SF Firearm BanCandidateVotesPercentWinnerYes 89,69657%http://images.ibsys.com/2000/0905/65680.gifNo 65,18542%http://images.ibsys.com/2000/0905/65680.gif

Dang, the vote wasn't even close. I guess that the voters actually believe that a criminal who robs, rapes and kills as a way of life is suddenly going to start abiding by this new law and turn in their handguns. It's difficult to fathom folks voting this severe restriction of their freedoms upon themselves.

DULLYJAY
11-09-2005, 7:59 AM
So is there going to be a check point before coming in the City?

esskay
11-09-2005, 8:06 AM
Holy crap. Speechless.

sac7000
11-09-2005, 8:22 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, it's not over until the fat lady sings...

mblat
11-09-2005, 8:24 AM
You know.... as much as I dislike Pat Bukanan - he is right - we are witnessing beginning of the end of western civilization.... We became too damn fat and too damn happy to be smart and effective.....

Well the only think about it is that after mexicans take back California they wan't ask anybody if it is ok to drill for oil off Santa Barbara... They will just do it and sell all that oil to China... :-(

alpenliter
11-09-2005, 8:28 AM
I suppose one could say it is a good thing that the prop H passed. For one thing, the criminals will become more aggressive, commit more crimes, kill more people. And we know that if we lose any of those nuts in SF we haven't lost much. (Tongue in Cheek). But the crime rate will really rise and show the rest of California what a stupid idea this really is. And I assume that all gun owners in SF that have any b---s will not give up their guns and will be much safer than the nuts that don't have them.

In addition, the NRA will finally have a case to take to the Supreme Court. Why they haven't taken one before now is a mystery to me, other than the makeup of the court. Since it is going to take awhile for this case to get there, and O'Connor should be gone, we stand a great chance of finally getting a ruling that says the Second Admendment really means the people can keep guns. In fact, a ruling may invalidate other gun laws already on the books. Lets hope so.

ady
11-09-2005, 8:32 AM
send them to me. they are legal here.

the proton
11-09-2005, 9:32 AM
Don't count on it. The NRA and its non-California membership have written us off. As far as our "brothers & sisters" in the other 49 are concerned, ANY Californian is a worthless, granola eating, gay parasite . As for the AG, he's got an anti-gun track record. Besides, the 9th Circus has rulled that the 2nd Ammendment is a collective right not an individual right. What we can look forward to is this crap extending beyond Frisco to the rest of the state.

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/Releases.aspx?ID=6839

Good news, at least they are starting the process and have officially committed to it. Of course we may still see the ban on ammo distrubution stand, etc.

HEUER
11-09-2005, 9:33 AM
Thank you Ted. Even the Mayor stated last night that the gun laws are likely to stay the same.

shecky
11-09-2005, 9:45 AM
The vultures should go back to their perches and you guys should put away your mourning veils.


I agree. All the drama is premature.

This is exactly the reason I dislike the initiative process. It allows hacks to create bad laws, encourages the belief we're under a simple democracy system, and discourages voters when half the initiatives fail the inevitable court test, are worked around via loopholes or simply ignored. All the while taking heat off the legislators by allowing them to wash their hands of the mess.

bg
11-09-2005, 9:48 AM
Well I don't know how it will play out, but if it sticks, I feel
for the cops and their widows when those with criminal
intent and armed take em on..

mblat
11-09-2005, 9:57 AM
I agree. All the drama is premature.



I think most people realize that this ban has very little chance of being enforced. What "drama" is all about is the one more crude reminder to the fact that MOST people in San Francisco ( and may be in whole California ) would be happy with outlawing not anly handguns bu ALL guns period!
It is very unplesant to be reminded that what you hold as constitutional right is something that most people would like to overturn....
Being reduced to "court has to fix that" croud is demining.

C.G.
11-09-2005, 10:24 AM
One good thing about the ban is that it may actually get gun owners to form a stronger opposition. I have been involved with RKBA for a couple of weeks and I am beginning to realize that even a lot of gunowners do not really care to take the initiative (till something gets banned and then they just moan).

guncollector
11-09-2005, 10:26 AM
I wonder how many SF gun owners are actually NRA or RKBA members?

You think they got the wake-up call?

shecky
11-09-2005, 10:43 AM
I think most people realize that this ban has very little chance of being enforced. What "drama" is all about is the one more crude reminder to the fact that MOST people in San Francisco ( and may be in whole California ) would be happy with outlawing not anly handguns bu ALL guns period!
It is very unplesant to be reminded that what you hold as constitutional right is something that most people would like to overturn....
Being reduced to "court has to fix that" croud is demining.

You make my point about the crappiness of the initiative process. However, I don't necessarily think resorting to the courts is demeaning, but rather a affirmation of the constitutional process.

mblat
11-09-2005, 10:57 AM
It only means one thing, armed criminals will begin their outright assault on humanity.


I think you overreacting here ( is it a wishfull thinking ?) Chance for criminal to run into armed citizen in SF even today are almost non-existant. SF aren't Maimi almost nobody owns guns anyway! So criminal not likely to consider gun opwnership anyway and there won't be any significant increase in the crime rates.
And saying "no guns today - criminals will go wild tommorow" is no different than "allow assult weapons - there will be blood rivers on the streets" - it isn't going

In general I agree than no guns means higher VIOLENT crime rates - but it takes years, if not decades for tendency to become evedent.

So let's now give ammunition to people who want strip our rights to poses it!

E__WOK
11-09-2005, 10:59 AM
Only 153,000 people voted on this? Aren't there at least 500,000 people in San Fransisco (not including the homeless, which makes it 1 million)?

We have around 700-800,000 people here. 20% is pretty darn sorry.

tpliquid1
11-09-2005, 11:02 AM
if they let people vote onlien i would vote online. im a fat lazy *** that doesnt want to drive

jdberger
11-09-2005, 11:06 AM
if they let people vote onlien i would vote online. im a fat lazy *** that doesnt want to drive

Right now I just don't know how to respond to that statement in a civil way.:mad:

mblat
11-09-2005, 11:19 AM
if they let people vote onlien i would vote online. im a fat lazy *** that doesnt want to drive

Lemme guess.... You also to lazy to pick up pen and fill up absentee ballot.

loyalpatriot
11-09-2005, 12:05 PM
this is just a very sad day, still its not over till its over

tpliquid1
11-09-2005, 12:33 PM
Lemme guess.... You also to lazy to pick up pen and fill up absentee ballot.

do they also offer it in chinglish?
my chinese isnt that great i need chinese mixed in with english

guncollector
11-09-2005, 12:49 PM
do they also offer it in chinglish?
my chinese isnt that great i need chinese mixed in with english

Fire Mission: tpliquid1 to IGNORE LIST.

.
.
.

Mission Accomplished.

rgs1975
11-09-2005, 12:52 PM
I used to be proud to say I was a native Californian. This state now disgusts me to the absolute core. Pathetic, worthless and morally deficient ***** hole of an excuse for a state in this nation.

lazyman
11-09-2005, 12:57 PM
well thats sad Prop H had to pass but we gun owners are the minority in kalifornia:( . I think the NRA will win the case. It's scarey man because if it passed in SF, then which city is next to try???:confused:

lazyman
11-09-2005, 12:58 PM
well thats sad Prop H had to pass but we gun owners are the minority in kalifornia:mad:. I think the NRA will win the case. It's scarey man because if it passed in SF, then which city is next to try???:confused:

tpliquid1
11-09-2005, 1:00 PM
well thats sad Prop H had to pass but we gun owners are the minority in kalifornia:mad:. I think the NRA will win the case. It's scarey man because if it passed in SF, then which city is next to try???:confused:

im guessing oakland

jdberger
11-09-2005, 1:16 PM
im guessing oakland

but what do you care? you can't even manage to get up off your "fat lazy ***" to vote.:mad:

tpliquid1
11-09-2005, 1:23 PM
ur right i appoligize,i take that back

bg
11-09-2005, 1:44 PM
I want Dirty Harry as the new mayor of SF..:D

jdberger
11-09-2005, 1:47 PM
Don't worry, the new avatar is just temporary.

I'm usually against hating someone for their political beliefs. I'm willing to make an exception, here.

SixDemonBag
11-09-2005, 2:17 PM
Any word on the court challenge/anything being done legally to prevent this from becoming law? I heard the NRA was supposed to take it to court today.

jdberger
11-09-2005, 2:33 PM
From CraigsList
http://www.craigslist.org/sfc/rnr/110053763.html

I hate San Francisco

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: pers-110053763@craigslist.org
Date: 2005-11-09, 12:14PM PST


I can't tell you how angry I am. I'm a 22 year old crack dealer and operate just off Market and 6th. I also do a bit of pimpin'. You say that's illegal??? I don't give a ****.

I always carry a lot of cash, usually 5 or 6 thousand dollars in my pocket. But I'm a cheap bastard, I admit it. If I want something I see in a store, I usually just ****in steal it. People don't **** with me, cause they know I'm packing. I just lift up my shirt a bit so they can get a glimps of it in my waistband. That works all the time. It's a nice stainless Ruger .357 mag. Small, but real easy to draw and packs a major ****in' punch... 5 punches in fact. And I'll deny it in court, but I've had to use it... it's gotten me out of trouble a few times.

But now I've got a problem. You see, I'm still gunna deal crack and women, but now I can't carry my Ruger. What the **** am I gunna do now that it's illegal to have a gun? Carry a freeking baseball bat? A lead pipe? I don't want to get into trouble by having a gun... I mean ****, it's illegal!!!! I don't want to break the gun law!!! Guess I'll just have to get a big ****in knife. 'Cause if I get popped by the cops while I'm dealing dope and *****, I don't want to have a gun on me.

http://b.im.craigslist.org/LA/On/4IJ5jcT9lSrLQhhjODLcGipMyTdV.jpg

no -- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests

PanzerAce
11-09-2005, 2:38 PM
ahahahaahahahahaha, some one should forward that to those who wanted this ****ed up law ( I would, but I got classes in 10 mins, and it takes 8 mins to get there :(

guncollector
11-09-2005, 3:22 PM
Any word on the court challenge/anything being done legally to prevent this from becoming law? I heard the NRA was supposed to take it to court today.

A copy of the Writ of the official Appeal can be found at Calgunlaws.com (http://www.calgunlaws.com). It's being filed today.

Mike
11-09-2005, 3:29 PM
Ok, quick question. I was reading the "pre-emption" thread at AR15.com...but I seem to recall that some city/county banned 50's in CA, and then soon after Ahnold signed the 50 ban STATEWIDE...so why wasn't pre-emption used then?

It's started, SF is first, is LA's "prominent" City Council (in their own minds) next to ban ownership of firearms??

Placebo
11-09-2005, 3:49 PM
Ok, quick question. I was reading the "pre-emption" thread at AR15.com...but I seem to recall that some city/county banned 50's in CA, and then soon after Ahnold signed the 50 ban STATEWIDE...so why wasn't pre-emption used then?

AB50 was a state law. The idea of premeption revolves around the concept that a locality can't create laws that directly run contrary to the state constitution.

On a broader scale, the states can't make laws that run contrary to the U.S. Constitution. That is where AB50 and other anti-gun laws need to be challenged.

Ex: If Mississippi were to pass a state law that allowed for slavery, the Constitutional challenges would be obvious. The same should apply to the 2A and the more overt laws that violate this guarantee.

It's started, SF is first, is LA's "prominent" City Council (in their own minds) next to ban ownership of firearms??

Nothing short of a statewide proposition (unlike prop. H) or legislation will work for an outright ban on firearms.

Mike
11-09-2005, 4:36 PM
AB50 was a state law. The idea of premeption revolves around the concept that a locality can't create laws that directly run contrary to the state constitution.

On a broader scale, the states can't make laws that run contrary to the U.S. Constitution. That is where AB50 and other anti-gun laws need to be challenged.

Ex: If Mississippi were to pass a state law that allowed for slavery, the Constitutional challenges would be obvious. The same should apply to the 2A and the more overt laws that violate this guarantee.



Nothing short of a statewide proposition (unlike prop. H) or legislation will work for an outright ban on firearms.

Were it not for some place like Contra Costa County or something that originally banned 50's?

AntiBubba 2.1
11-09-2005, 5:13 PM
ALL RIGHT!!!!!!!


Truly, this is cause for celebration!


Oh, c'mon, you knew this was going to pass, didn't you? So look at all the things that will happen from this event:


Finally, The NRA will bring it's attentions to California again; they've neglected us for too long

The City will be forced to spend millions of dollars it doesn't have to fight for a law it couldn't make stick in court last time it tried this, and this time, it could get to the SCOTUS, and get a ruling

Most importantly, it will jump start the 2006 initiative to amend California's Constitution to include the Right To Keep And Bear Arms. Which one of you is San Francisco County's petition coordinator?


I just had a gun shop decline to post flyers for Sacramento County's effort to get the RKBA initiative on the ballot-they don't want to get involved in anything political. :mad: It's time to hang together, or we shall assuredly hang separately.

1911_sfca
11-09-2005, 6:51 PM
I wonder how many SF gun owners are actually NRA or RKBA members?

You think they got the wake-up call?

On page 5 or the brief for this lawsuit, it is stated that the NRA has "tens of thousands of members" in San Francisco.

Yes, we got a wake up call. If we hadn't been putting up hundreds of posters, handing out thousands of flyers, and communicating to many friends, prop H would have gotten a MUCH higher yes vote -- think 80%.

Pryde
11-09-2005, 7:13 PM
OMG, has nobody here realized the obvious consequences of this ban??!??!

OAKLAND IS GONNA COME ACROSS THE BAY AND LOOT AND BURN DOWN SF!

I can only imagine the armies of illegally armed gangsters in raiders gear swarming the streets of san francisco terrorizing the unarmed populace. :)

SemperFiVet
11-09-2005, 7:18 PM
Unbelievable,

Only in S.F.
Nothing against you supporters of the U.S. Constitution.

I wonder if this will trickle down to other cities. Hopefully the NRA will prevail.

Can you imagine what would happen if S.F. was with the big one, criminals with their guns, would have a field day looting, with no one to stop them. Oh, I'm sorry-criminals have to turn in their guns too, right.

Do the police officers have to turn in their own personal weapons? Does anyone know?

Recently retired Devil Dog!!!!!!!!!!!

1911_sfca
11-09-2005, 7:30 PM
Can you imagine what would happen if S.F. was with the big one, criminals with their guns, would have a field day looting, with no one to stop them. Oh, I'm sorry-criminals have to turn in their guns too, right.


Don't think we didn't already make all these arguments... they're obvious to anyone with a good head on their shoulders.

But wanna here something REALLY unbelievable? The answer to your question is no, criminals don't have to turn in their weapons due to this law. It specifically exempts anyone already prohibited from possessing arms under state law, which includes all felons and many other criminals. What a joke. Luckily, it won't hold up in court for a second. If it does, we've all got BIG problems.

dwtt
11-09-2005, 8:41 PM
It's scarey man because if it passed in SF, then which city is next to try???:confused:

Several people here have expressed a fear that this disease will spread, possibly to their own county or statewide. Well, consider this a wake up call that bay area gunowners missed. I live in Fremont and helped to spread the word against H in San Francisco. No other gun owners outside of SF volunteered to help out. The folks from the Marin Second Amendment Coalition came to my table at the Cow Palace Gun show to drop off some of their fliers, which wasn't specificly addressed to SF voters, but they didn't come by to help when we were putting up signs in the City. When the ban was just a proposal, I realized it might follow a path like the .50 caliber ban, and wanted to help kill it in SF before it spreads. Now it's too late, the beast has survived it's birth, I only hope it dies before it can grow. Only 39% of registered voters in SF voted and of those, 42% voted against the gun ban. If we had more help and was able to get the word out to more neighborhoods, it's possible the gun ban would have been defeated, but we didn't have more help and wasn't able to reach every neighborhood, so we'll never know if the majority of SF voters would oppose this ban. I'm very sad at how gunowners in the bay area living outside SF didn't do anything to help stop Prop H. I have seen Jnojr turn cynical from his experiences in the south, and I hope I don't become like that, but looking at how gunowners in this state behave, it's a question of when, not if, the day will come when all of our guns will be banned.

donger
11-09-2005, 9:22 PM
Incredible, I cannot believe that something like this, after all the chaos in the world, has come to fruition.

Clodbuster
11-09-2005, 9:30 PM
So what gun shop is this? If all this shop is interested in is making a short term quick buck before all guns are banned in CA, then maybe it doesn't deserve support of gun owners. :mad:

Clod

ALL RIGHT!!!!!!!
I just had a gun shop decline to post flyers for Sacramento County's effort to get the RKBA initiative on the ballot-they don't want to get involved in anything political. :mad: It's time to hang together, or we shall assuredly hang separately.

artherd
11-09-2005, 9:38 PM
if they let people vote onlien i would vote online.
I think that says it all.

Henry47
11-09-2005, 10:06 PM
if they let people vote onlien i would vote online. im a fat lazy *** that doesnt want to drive

Just to let everyone know, tpliquid1 doesn't even live in San Francisco County. I know him personally and he lives 40-50 miles away from SF

QuarterBoreGunner
11-09-2005, 10:56 PM
Wow. A lot of smoke and noise in here.

Ok #1, Halifax-BTW, how will this effect the 10 CCW holders in SF?
..Uhm..not at all? My permit is issued by the Cali DOJ and they hold the trump card over city law. Which this isn't... which brings us to...

#2, TechnicalTed- The vultures should go back to their perches and you guys should put away your mourning veils.
..exactly.

Guys it's San Francisco; 99% of the populace gets all their knowledge of firearms from the movies and TV, and 100% of their firearms laws from the poiticians and popular media. It was bound to pass. Oh sure I had a little hope at the end when the Gavin Newsome stated that it was doomed to fail in the courts, when the SF Chronicle advised a 'no vote' saying that it would cost the city millions in the courts to try and fight the inevitable court battles that would ultimately fail.
Hell, even the SFPD POA came out against it as completely unenforceable and I checked the weirder ‘alt.news’ sites and even the freakin’ local anarchist and communist wackos said it was a bad idea and advised against it. Ok, yeah, their reasoning was that when the inevitable revolution came, they needed to be armed against the police state, but what the hell.

Ok so it passed. Big deal. It won’t become law until April 2006. State law over rules the city and I’m totally unconcerned.

Sure it looks bad, but honestly it won’t come to mean anything.
Let me wax a little Shakespeare at ya:

“..this is a tale told by an idiot, full of noise and fury, signifying nothing.”

And that’s what this will ultimately be.

Charliegone
11-09-2005, 11:26 PM
The problem is selective openess. You pick what you want to be open about. Which is the case in San Fran.

NwG
11-09-2005, 11:43 PM
Well while this is all very scary and compleatly wrong, I do have a question..

Lets say for a min. that this law stays and they did everything they could to enforce it.. What would you do? I was talking with some friends and got some very mixed answers..

Move away? Lie? Fight to the death? sell your handguns (which I guess would be illegal)?
I got all these from the people I talked with.. I would like to know.. From those who do live in SF.. What would you do? Personaly I would leave the state..

SI-guru
11-09-2005, 11:50 PM
Wow. A lot of smoke and noise in here.

Ok so it passed. Big deal. It won’t become law until April 2006. State law over rules the city and I’m totally unconcerned.

----snip-----

Sure it looks bad, but honestly it won’t come to mean anything.
Let me wax a little Shakespeare at ya:

“..this is a tale told by an idiot, full of noise and fury, signifying nothing.”

And that’s what this will ultimately be.


Remember the gay marriage stun Gavin Newsom pulled ? Everyone wrote it off as it won't mean anything because the court will strike it down ?

Even after prop 22, the legislators still tried to legalize homo wedding after seeing what SF did. And it only takes Arnold's veto to take it down.

There are enough liberals in Sacramento who will take the SF ban as open season to try it statewide and they may just have enough vote to do it.

Arnold is badly demaged in this one and there is a very good chance a democrap governor will be elected in '06.

I don't want to wait for this to happen.

lazyman
11-10-2005, 1:16 AM
we gun owners are a minority and are really unorganized to some extent. Besides the gian lobby groups and stuff we need to organize into a coalition of kali gun owners that is willing to get every single gun owner out to the polls so we can make our voice heard. We always hear about the anti gun rallies but never about the progun ralllies(well, I've never heard of one). This forum is a great start but it only has 2,500 members. I'm sure there are thousands and thousands more out there that we need to reach.

MrEd
11-10-2005, 2:17 AM
Well there we have it Supervisor Daly's at it again . The ban passed but will be killed after a few millions that the city does not have . A few programs will be shut due to the lack of funds and everyone will scream in outrage .
But even if the law stays in the view of the crime solving prowess of our Police Department I am not to worried . I am a SF resident and I take the fitfth to the question do I own a gun , further we should turn in our handguns but wait , where is the compensation ?
I take offense to the reference to Gay people as Homo , I personally am not gay but maybe we should stop calling our fellow man all sorts of deragotary terms . Gay people do own guns for one . Further do I believe it is not my right to judge another persons choice of lifestyle . I refuse to deny anyone the same rights I enjoy , maybe if we do a little more of that will others do the same and we then can enjoy the right to keep and bear arms even in CA .
I did my part and got 24 votes against prop H , all my neighbors voted against it . We should not judge others for their choices so that we in turn will no tbe judged .
Be vocal in denying a gay person the right to marry and he will turn around and vote in favor of prop H anyday , no one asks you to wave the rainbow flag or anything but let us move away from the stereotypes of the gun owner and project the image of we California Gun owners are people just like you and not as portrayed in the liberal media the long haired beer drinking extreme right blue collar guys . tolerance works both ways

artherd
11-10-2005, 7:12 AM
I am a SF resident and I take the fitfth to the question do I own a gun

TOO BAD, you registered 'em via DROS. They already know exactly how many you have.

BigMac
11-10-2005, 7:55 AM
the registry is a joke.. I sold a Chales Daly 45 from my personal collection. The guy got in trouble with the pistol and couldn't get it back because it wasn't registered to him, it was still registered to me.

Fortunetly for him, I keep good records.

dwtt
11-10-2005, 8:18 AM
Wow. A lot of smoke and noise in here.

Ok so it passed. Big deal. It won?t become law until April 2006. State law over rules the city and I?m totally unconcerned.

Sure it looks bad, but honestly it won?t come to mean anything.
.

This is missing the point. Even if the ban in SF might not be enforcible or have much effect, it can and likely will spread to the state level. That is why we had to kill it in SF. This isn't smoke and noise. The .50 cal ban in Contra Costa county began as a ban on the entire county, but had to be amended to affect only gun dealers in unincorporated parts of the county in order to get it passed. People said it's not a big deal because there were no dealers selling .50cal rifles in unincorporated parts of the county, just like some people are saying the SF gun ban is just smoke and noise. Koret took the .50cal ban statewide and now our .50cal bolt action single shot rifles are classified as assault weapons and not available for purchase anymore. There will be a day in the future when a ban like Prop H will be brought up to the state level, and will we be saying it's just smoke and noise then?

lazyman
11-10-2005, 12:12 PM
after handguns, our registered AW, after that our non-evil long guns. We have to make our voice heard but how??????

jdberger
11-10-2005, 12:17 PM
ahahahaahahahahaha, some one should forward that to those who wanted this ****ed up law ( I would, but I got classes in 10 mins, and it takes 8 mins to get there :(

CraigsList pulled it, but I sent it to the Board of Supes. Hope they enjoy it as much as we did. (anyone wanna pony up some bail money?) :D

jdberger
11-10-2005, 12:19 PM
after handguns, our registered AW, after that our non-evil long guns. We have to make our voice heard but how??????

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=67

Here you go. I hope to see you listed on the volunteer form. :)

hat tip to jnojr.

icormba
11-10-2005, 12:23 PM
after handguns, our registered AW, after that our non-evil long guns. We have to make our voice heard but how??????

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=67

Here you go. I hope to see you listed on the volunteer form. :)

hat tip to jnojr.

lazyman ;) :)

lazyman
11-10-2005, 12:34 PM
shhh, I'm in class right now, can't read everyting right now. I know some gun shops that could be used to collect signatures. I also know a lot of gun and registered AW owners. I'll take a better look at the link when I get home. I can get some signatures at least 50 to 100.

jdberger
11-10-2005, 12:37 PM
Thanks for your enthusiasm.

Remember...first you tell two friends, then they tell two friends then they tell two friends....

dadoody
11-10-2005, 12:52 PM
Wow.

Just wow.



None of the ballet measures passed and this did. Liberals have a choke hold on this state. How the hell did it come to this....

K_SNIPER
11-12-2005, 8:13 PM
Los Angeles is next...:mad:

lazyman
11-12-2005, 8:18 PM
how dare you say that:mad: :p

K_SNIPER
11-12-2005, 8:30 PM
Well...with all the other crap goin on I'm sure the ANTI-GUN fanatics in LA County will jump right on the band wagon..

PanzerAce
11-12-2005, 10:22 PM
yah, but consider the social make up of LA. I would think it would be harder for this kind of ****ed up law to pass down there